If we only produce content that people are searching for, will this lead to better quality content ? Will this lead to the growth of the knowledge base? How will new knowledge enter the mainstream if content is only developed to satisfy current demand?
Yes. If we only "create" what people are looking for, we'll go nowhere. That's an undeniable fact, and how stagnation occurs. It's pretty much what humanity has already done for a long time. Nothing new. It's unfortunate we've been given this powerful tool called the Internet and that's where it's at.
Agreed. It like we are self-regulating what should or should not be on-line by the reward system that is in place.
Content is produced every day which people have never searched for before. Until July 24, 2013, no one ever searched for 'Prince George Alexander Louis.' The content was produced first on news sites, based on a press release, and then people began searching for the information.
Conversely, 25% of searches everyday are for searches new to the Google search engine and no one has written "exact match" content for these queries.
This is the dynamic between searchers and content providers.
Is there a place to see what people are searching for that has no exact match?
Outside of Googleplex, No. This is one of the reasons that Google developed the Hummingbird algorithm. The algorithm more clearly determines the user's intent with a search query so that Google can find appropriate results in its index.
What you can do is read news websites and check Google Trends:
These will give you some ideas for writing new content. I would still suggest doing keyword research on the Keyword Planner and using new terms in combination with the ones which have a track record in the Google index.
SEO is the part of Internet/Digital Marketing. It is one of the technique of marketing. We can say that all those things which raise your business ethically are good.
Writer Fox is spot on.
There are quite literally tonnes of search queries that Google comes up with nothing close as a match.
It's for those websites that search engine optimization should be implemented.
SEO is far from bias - I have modified many different clients webpages for a search engine - Shops, Pizza places, Vehicle Hoist Manufacturers (I could go on all day).
What I'm getting at is, the chances are that there is a website that most likely has all that content that people are searching for. It's most likely not in Googles index.
For Google to find a website, if it hasn't been submitted and verified with webmaster tools, there has to be some kind of indication that it even exists (e.g a backlink etc..)
SEO is then used in many aspects of a website.
The optimization of a websites URL structure and HTML script.
The head section of the document has important SEO meta-data.
SEO is incorporated into the body of a document as well. It is used to get there content shown in a users query.
There are also specific pages/scripts that have been created only for a search engine. These are needed to accurately display a website.
Without at least one of the 3 fundamentals, a website is very unlikely to be displayed in a search query, regardless of how unique its content is.
SEO is not writing about what you think people are searching for. That's bad SEO.
Good SEO is using tools to learn exactly what it is that your core audience -- the ones actually interested in your topics or business -- are seeking when they come to you via particular kinds of searches, and then using your knowledge, experience and skills to give them the best answers to their questions. The key is that you're not picking whatever content you think will attract visitors, but making the content you're intending to write anyway more useful to your visitors.
Saying SEO is bad is like saying it's bad when a doctor gives patients the proper tests and treatments to help them with their particular conditions. Or when a store or library is well-organized so that customers can easily find what they need. Or when a lawyer creates business cards to hand out to people wanting her contact information.
Um, no. Those are useful. They are helping customers find them, and then tailoring their service to suit the needs of their clients.
That makes a lot of sense and gives me a new perspective on the whole SEO issue. So, it's all about using SEO to deliver your content to the world and not using SEO to deliver anything that is been searched.
If I have something new to tell the world, I should use SEO to make sure that it becomes mainstream knowledge. Noted.
Excellent explanation of how it should work. I wish more saw it that way.
SEO motivates people to write good stuff online, so it helps internet becomes more useful to people.
I was thinking a little more about this, and something kept bouncing around in my skull: not all web content is or should be optimized for search traffic.
Search traffic means people who are looking for something specific: an answer to a question, or an article about some topic or product they're interested in. So the best thing to do for search traffic is to write focused, purposeful pages where you address one topic, problem or question and stick to one subject.
But people use the web for things besides searching. They read. They browse. They enjoy. That kind of content is important, too. However, its core audience is not users of search engines. When you're writing those kinds of things, SEO and search engines are totally irrelevant; the readers who like what you're writing will not search for your stuff, any more than you'd start with a Google search to decide what magazine article to read next.
Those kinds of readers tend to come in through word of mouth, social media: Twitter, Google+, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest. They require you to use a different approach. Good pictures, entertaining writing, fascinating material, or writing a lot on one subject so that you build up a following or become known for a certain niche may help there.
Either way, it ain't easy.
I think the main thing about web optimization is to try to remember that the best kind of optimization is that which of benefit to our visitors, not just a trick to fool search engines or people on social networks into coming to pages that don't deliver. The latter is the "Boy Who Cried Wolf" method, and it isn't sustainable. Sooner or later search engines or social media sites will block us as spammers, unless we really are delivering the kind of content people expect and want when they click on links to our pages.
(And of course, you don't have to write with an audience in mind. But if you don't, then you're saying, "I'm just writing this for its own sake; I don't care how much traffic I get.")
SEO Gurus - please riddle me this:
I have been doing a little SEO work for a friend and on Bing and Yahoo, his site is coming up on page 2 for two terms optimized for and one page 1 for a third term. Google on the other hand ignores the site, with average placements around 167.
Why are Bing and Yahoo responding to my efforts while Google rejects them. The SEO efforts have been performed over the last 6-8 weeks on a revamped website (several new pages and some old ones were trashed)that had languished for years.
1. Yahoo search is powered by Bing. So, effectively, there is no longer a Yahoo search engine.
2. Google and Bing operate with different algorithms.
Not knowing any more about what the site is and what has been done or not done, nobody can really answer your question. Use the checklist on my SEO Tips Hub to see if you covered all of the bases to succeed on Google.
Thanks. I was just wondering if there was a fundamental difference or if Google is. Slower to make adjustments that move up a new player into the established player lists. This is as Atlanta hair salon. I will go check your list and get cracking on the next round!
Nothing is good or bad but that our thinking makes it so. - William Shakespeare.
by Cayden Ryan6 years ago
Hey, just wanted to let you know that a company called ProspectMX is sending a doll of Matt Cutts into space (actually like 2000 feet, but still.)For all you SEO/Internet Marketing Gurus, I'm sure you know he's a big...
by Audrey Selig6 years ago
Did I get lucky or what? The only problem is that there is not much traffic. I spent a lot of time with Adwords Keyword tool, and I bought an SEO book by Michael Miller and asked a lot of questions in the forum. Thanks...
by Loraine Brummer7 months ago
Which is the most important for search engine searches: the Hub summary or the first paragraph of the Hub? I thought the summary was most important, but I notice that sometimes searches show the first sentences in...
by Glamorously Jacob4 years ago
I'm officially now my first month into HubPages and loving it; however, I'd like to share with the community some of the observations I've made in the first 30 days.The OpportunityLet me start by saying that I think...
by Liz Elias5 years ago
While keywords, as part of your article are indeed important to the SEO "thing," and, as part of your article, they should be spelled properly and in the correct grammatical format, the tags you add outside...
by Liz Elias4 weeks ago
I just finished a massive edit of this hub:http://hubpages.com/sports/Camping-For- … -and-Enjoywhich was originally published in April of 2011.It has among the lowest traffic of any of my hubs, and shows up...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.